Article"Area state lawmakers react to budget proposal"Is Not Available At This Time.

01/18/2012 7:03AM

Area state lawmakers react to budget proposal

Please enter your comments below.

01/18/2012 8:54AM

Just an average guy

"It will provide no short-term savings and will mean people will have to work longer, pay more and gain less benefit."...exactly why I have no respect for Danny Donohue. He has no sense whatsoever that the economics of this country and this state have changed since these contracts were put in place. We are all "working longer, paying more, and gaining less benefits". Welcome to the new real world. His unwavering stand against reform will sell all his members down the drain as they all get their letters in the future cutting their retirement benefits rather than reforming now to preserve what existing members have. If he thinks "too good to be true" is a forever guarantee, he should study what happened to Eastman Kodak to see how his kingdom and the benefits of all its member can one day fail.

01/18/2012 2:01PM

Keep cutting DEC? Really?

DEC has lost so much staff, they barely have the capability to get out there and clean up the disgusting toxic dump we call Buffalo. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not get cancer, thanks to past careless business practices.....

01/18/2012 2:50PM

Public Employees

Need to include having them pay NYS income taxes on their pensions also, JUST LIKE THE REST OF US!

03/08/2012 5:28PM

jBzxUhioBKbNCCkciZa

Note: Originally received via emaila0to Editora0a0Dear Sir,I have read the first issue of your Gazette' svereal times and far from finding your pages full of good news' my reaction has been one of extreme disappointment. Frankly, I cannot believe that your system has even the slightest chance of acceptance by the Australian people, and that is the only good thing I can say about it.To begin with, you quite rightly describe Australians as apolitical'. That is because politicians are generally thought of as untrustworthy, lazy and chiefly motivated by self-interest. They are also often thought of as greedy and grossly overpaid. Now this may sound rather harsh and perhaps it is but it does reflect the opinion of the general populace and one of the main reasons people think this way is that there are simply FAR TOO MANY POLITICIANS. Consider this. England has between 60 and 65 million citizens but manages to get by with one Queen and two houses of Parliament. Here in Australia we have to have no less than 7 representatives of the same Queen and a staggering 14 houses of Parliament 15 if you include the ACT. All this for a population one third that of Britain. Your system not only fails to recognise and therefore address this major flaw in our present constitution, it actually seeks to exacerbate the problem by adding a sovereign' for a mere $2 million a year (no doubt generously indexed). Do you really think the Australian people could not suggest a better use for this money? As I am sure you know the States are a legacy from our colonial past. That is where they belong because they have absolutely no relevance in a modern Australia. They are ridiculuously expensive, a deterrent to progress and perform no task that could not be better handled by direct negotiation between the National government and Regional and Local councils.There is another suggestion in your gazette that I am absolutely opposed to. The one I refer to is that made by Peter Carden stating that the states should not be bound by the results of any referendum on the question of whether or not we should become a Republic. Given that an affirmative vote from all of the states and territories is unlikely, such a provision would almost certainly result in the breakup and therefore the destruction of Australia as a united nation. Our present constitution requires that all states are bound by the results of a referendum and that condition must be preserved at all costs. One of the greatest freedoms that we enjoy in this country is the ability to travel the length and breadth of our land without once having to change currency, without having to go through immigration and customs, without having to have a passport or a visa and without ever being confronted by armed border guards. Frankly, I am shocked that any rational, thinking Australian would even consider risking such a thing, even for one second, far less seriously offer it as a model to be adopted. Let me assure you, there is no one in this country more committed to an Australian Republic than I am, yet I would rather, much rather see us remain with the monarchy than risk seeing our nation destroyed as a result of such an ill-considered proposal.I suggest that you rethink your paradigm'.Yours faithfully,James F. Stack